Well, my guess is that people will profit from the announcement of a Metcalf code review, and then profit some more from XC.

 , hey you should get Dan Metcalf to review it , Oh wait, ..

So you all know, I'm working on the OP now.

Because that's not how the market works. News pretty much doesn't do anything when are people going to get this. sigh.

Your scenario here is not analogous to the world of cryptocurrency:
1) Market players are not highly visible
2) Scams are rife
3) New projects continually bring new innovations to the market

None of these apply to the world of cars.

Hoertest summarised XC's advantage here very well:
- Supporters of other coins get to hear about XC. (1)
- XC gets to establish itself as the paragon of security and legitimacy. (2)
- XC gets to see every piece of new code that comes out, and benefit from it if there's anything useful there (3)


So do you get it now?

Also, a lot of the criticism of these reviews is completely cockeyed. Investors want Dan to focus purely on XC so that they get a return on investment? No:
- XC is already the technology leader. New tech from Dan isn't going to magically transform XC's value. A return on investment has to do with real-world market adoption, not some quick pump. This has been XC's plan from the beginning. Be patient.
- Dan himself wants a return on investment more than anyone else, and hold more XC than most. So what possible incentive would he have to not work for this end?


Think about it. Code reviews really make sense, for the reasons given above.

Imagine if you owned a ton of stock in a high-end luxury car company. But the lead designer/developer of these high-end cars, is paid by low-end car companies in his spare time, to review their car's features and release a statement like "this low-end car's features are safe and well made" (resulting in an immediate increased demand for the low-end car company's stock, because they received a stamp of approval from a high-end company). Then the plan is, by continuing to legitimize and confirm the quality of their low-end competitors, the demand for the high-end car's stock will eventually go up because the public will respect their expertise for confirming the quality of other cars? Seriously? As an investor in the luxury car company, you may hope that they use their higher quality as a competitive advantage, leveraged to increase the distance between them and their low-end competitors. Instead the company is actively promoting the quality of their competitors and closing that gap. Then trying to further justify it by saying its good for the industry and will help keep consumers safe? How about we market how much better our own technology is, try to entice consumers to buy our product, which can provide them with that high level of safety and confidence that is lacking in the industry. I can't blame Dan for wanting to make money, but damn. At least be honest in the statement and say "hey Dan is going to use his knowledge to review the code of some other coins for a little extra income". It doesn't take a business guru to see that this is not effective promotion for XC.